Compare and Contrast IT Security Policies (State Governments)

Decision Alternative #1

Do Not Expand FNS/ Do Nothing

Process- Do Not Expand FNS for the Holidays. Allison and James could decide that the decision is a risk all together. The Stewarts, may decide that their current business capital is enough for their small shop and enough to continue living a self-sustaining life.

Bias- Deciding not to expand will mitigate all bias, by continuing with regular operations and focusing on advancing the company’s current standards and procedures.

Application- Allison and James will have to continue operations as usual.

Uncertainties Associated with Alternative #1

Process- Uncertainties, are caused by a lack of knowledge. When corporations are not able to determine the effectiveness of a decision, it will become difficult for Allison and James to accurately make a decision. In the decision to do nothing, multiple uncertainties arise. Allison and James could be turning down the chance of a lifetime. Listed below are a couple of uncertainties that they will be faced with if they decide to do nothing and not expand the business.

1. Loss income/profits

2. Loss opportunities for expansion

3. Loss business partners/partnerships/mergers

4. Loss growth and sustainability

Bias- By reviewing the uncertainties within an alternative, Allison and James are able to better focus their attention on the risks, and potential loss associated with an alternative.

Application- Allison and James will review later in the PrOACT model, a weight based table putting both the benefits and the risk of alternative side, by side to pick an alternative.

Risk Tolerance Associated with Alternative #1 

Level of risk tolerance: Medium

Definition of Risk Tolerance: The ability for a company to sustain potential losses or damages that could come as a consequence to a decision or alternative.

With this alternative Allison and James face multiple risks. Without the holiday expansion and the current struggle to provide their consumer base with their quality popcorn, they could cause consumer to support other popcorn brands inducing competition within their marketplace. Allison and James will have to review all risks associated with this alternative to make sure it is the final decision for their company. The loss of quality service, while increasing competition and competitive profits never ends well with the smaller, home grown company.

Bias- Looking at the associated risks within an alternative can keep a company from moving forward with an alternative that seems practical before risk analysis. Allison and James must seriously consider the benefits, and the risks associated with the alternative to prevent any loss of objectives, and unwanted circumstances.

Stakeholders (impacts the alternatives and alternatives impact stakeholders)

The decision will affect potential investors, who are looking for ways to invest and grow their money.

Explanation

Process- Doing nothing mitigates all risk associated with expansion cost and personnel/employee wages. This alternative also maintains family and friend relationships while supporting current consumer-based want. Unfortunately, the risk presented without expansion, cause FNS to potentially loose quality of service, an increased consumer base, and potential mergers/partnerships/partners that could be very lucrative in their long term. They could also cause an increase in competitive behavior/growth because they are no longer able to sustain their growing client base.

Objectives (Horizontal) Alternatives

(Vertical)

Expand FNS

Save 401k

Save Friendships and Family

Gain Physical Assets to Support Expansion

Gain Employees to Support Expansion

Keep Quality of Service

Total

Alternative 1

Do Nothing / Do Not Expand

0

3

3

0

0

0

6

Alternative 2

Utilize Friends and Family

2

2

1

1

2

1

9

Alternative 3

Hire Temp-Workers

2

2

3

1

2

2

12

Alternative 4

Take A Loan

3

1

3

3

3

3

16

Alternative 5

Purchase Equipment

3

2

3

3

1

3

15

Decision Alternative #2

Family and Friends

Process- Currie (2017) has also presented the idea that friends and family can help the Stewarts in exchange for food and laughs. Overall cost of this alternative is $1800 for products and distribution.

Bias- Allowing friends and family to help with the company will mitigate bias, by having a multitude of resources, and ideas that could prevent unknown bias and unforeseen events.

Application- James and Allison, will open up volunteer opportunities to their friends stating they need a helping hand for the holidays. For all of the friends and family that decide they want to volunteer they will be allowed to do so. This idea will maximize profits while minimizing cost and overhead.

Uncertainties Associated with Alternative #2

Process- Unfortunately, there are many uncertainties that James and Allison will have to consider as family and friends, generally do not mix well with business. Although low on cost and overhead, friends and family will not be able to work as efficient as a paid employee. They may also need preferential treatments and business tolerance as they have lives of their own when performing services for free.

Bias- In order to curve the potential bias associated with this risk, James and Allison will have to review the process and the individual friends and family who may want to volunteer for the company. James and Allison will need to verify that their practices are completely ethical and will need to ask the individual family members how they may feel in regards to food for work done.

Application- By reviewing potential bias, and decision alternatives, Allison and James can ask their family members if they would like to assist. They will also ask them if they have any individual/personal bias against their decision to incorporate them into FNS.

Risk Tolerance Associated with Alternative #2

Level of risk tolerance: HIGH

Definition of Risk Tolerance: Risk are consequences, and unforeseen events that FSN, Allison and James will be able to tolerate in exchange for the benefits of a particular alternative. In regard to this dilemma there are multiple risk associated with employing family and friends, and paying them with food and laughter.Family members and friends may feel unappreciated and undervalued once they see the profits that FNS generates, causing rift or loss of the friendship and communication. There could also be a loss of quality in FNS products, as family and friends are not held to the same standards as paid employees.

Bias- Risks can definitely change the way in which James and Allison will view an alternative. Risk will provide more insight and helpful background information that will further sway the decision to move forward with one alternative or the other. Due to Allison’s and James’s desire to maintain their current relationships with friends, this alternative may not be the best for FNS company expansion techniques.

Explanation

Process- Overall the process to implement friends and family into FMS can be a costly one, not in terms of money, but in terms of personal validation and friend/family companionship. James and Allison must decide if gambling with their family and friends is worth the benefit of lower costs, overhead, and gained profits for FNS. The benefits to this alternative seems great but from a larger view, family and friends are all you have when everything else false. Allison and James will have to consider this fact, before they make a completely life changing decision, that will could impact their personal lives forever.

Decision Alternative #3

Hire Temp-Workers

Process- Currie (2017). Allison and James could hire, bonded and vetted temp-workers through an agency. The workers would work for a wage of $25 an hour costing a total of $20,000 which is possible but leaves no room for error for the Stewarts.

Bias- By reviewing this decision closely the Stewarts are able to make a non-biased decision focused on numbers and their effects on FNS.

Application- In order to apply this alternative, the Stewarts will have to go to a temp service to hire workers, and provide training. Since the employees will be paid an actual wage their quality of service should be greater and will provide a tangible, lucrative assets to FNS.

Uncertainties Associated with Alternative #3

Process- Uncertainties that are associated with this alternative. Allison and James could potentially miscalculate projected profits/gains, which would cause a deficient in their budget. They will also risk having to use their own capital to cover cost if the net gains/profits are underneath the projected margins.

Bias- By looking at the uncertainties associated with this alternative, the Stewarts will have further information and details on whether or not they want to continue with this particular alternative. Viewing the uncertainties also provides ways in which the Stewarts will be able mitigate bias/risks that may have been unforeseen/unknown.

Application- By looking at possible outcomes of this alternatives the Stewarts are able to decide if this alternative is the best alternative for FNS expansion.

Risk Tolerance Associated with Alternative #3

Level of risk tolerance: Medium

Definition of Risk Tolerance: The Stewarts, ability to recovery from unforeseen events and continue FNS operations. Based on this alternative, the only serious risk that the Stewarts, may face is the potential for decreased/low profit margins. If they do not make as much as expected they may have to pay from other areas, such as their saving and their 401k.

Bias- By reviewing the risk associated with this decision, the Stewarts are able to mitigate bias and benefits that may have profitable in their endeavors to expand FNS.

Explanation

Process- Based off of this alternative, Allison and James are closer to solving their business dilemma. Considering the alternatives, they have a lot of different factors to choose from that are all unique in consequences, bias, and risk associated with them. Allison and James will review later in the PrOACT model, the trade-offs and consequences further in depth before they make a decision on how they are to proceed with expanding FNS.

Decision Alternative #4

Obtain a Bank Loan

Process- Currie (2017). By obtaining a bank loan Allison and James are able to hire, a more professional workforce that would solidify FNS future. They are guaranteed the quality service and purchase the many different types of equipment they will need to maximize products, purchase advertisement and solidify FNS longevity, IF projected profit margins are met.

Bias- The Stewarts called AARP for advice in regard to obtaining a loan. The advice that was given was able to influence the Stewarts decision to obtain a loan, and curb and self-interested bias that the Stewarts may have.

Application- In order to obtain a loan, the Stewarts will have to get approved for a loan, and then purchase all the necessary equipment/assets and hire the appropriate personnel to support expansion.

Uncertainties Associated with Alternative #4

Process- Again, projected profit margins become an issue for this particular alternative. If the Stewart’s are unable to meet profit margins and sustain FNS expansion they will be faced with large amounts of debts from loans with high interest rates. They will also have to consider a post collateral loan, which could potentially cause them to lose their home if they do not meet profit margins. James and Allison will have to find ways to mitigate this uncertainty by deciding if expansion is going to guarantee them a profit.

Bias- By viewing the uncertainties associated with the alternative, bias is able to be mitigated and addressed when attempting to accept loans with high APRs. This will also prevent James and Allison from entering into a loan when they feel it is a win-win but could have detrimental risks associated with it.

Application- By applying the uncertainties to this alternative, the Stewarts are able to view this alternative with all its potential uncertainties, swaying the decision to one alternative to the other.

Risk Tolerance Associated with Alternative #4

Level of risk tolerance: Medium

Definition of Risk Tolerance: Allison and James’s ability to pay off high interest debt in the event that they do not reach profit margins, from the holidays season will determine their risk tolerance. If they are able to pay back the debt from the loan in the event that profit margins are not met, they will be able to tolerate the risk associated with this alternative.

If they enter into a post collateral loan, they could potentially lose their house, so these types of loans will be completely off the table.

Last but not least, if they are not able to pay the debt with FNS profits, they will have to touch their 401Ks in order to continue with FNS operations.

Bias- By viewing the risks associated with this alternative, Allison and James are able to view the cost that may not offset the benefits with this alternative. The risk in this alternative may potential sway the Stewarts decision to one alternative or another, as discussed later in the PrOACT model.

Explanation

Process- Based off the work so far many of the alternatives are meeting the objectives that were discussed earlier in the Stewarts business dilemma.

Decision Alternative #5

Purchase Equipment

Process- Currie (2017). James has considered purchasing equipment to assist in production. The new equipment will cost $11,500 but will offset the cost of employees, the loss of family and friends, a bank loan, and $20,000 professional employees. James believes he can install this new equipment before September and he will be ready for the Holiday rush.

Bias- If James is able to view all consequences, risks, associated with this alternative, he will be able to mitigate bias and potentially use this alternative to solve FNS business decisions. He will need to discuss this with Allison, but ultimately this alternative could be a good idea, once all risk and associated cost are weighed correctly.

Application- Allison and James would have to purchase and install the equipment. Although they are short-handed at this time the equipment could help complete small task that could take large amount of time to complete, relieving FNS need for more employees.

Objectives (Horizontal) Alternatives

(Vertical)

Expand FNS

X5

Save 401k

Save Friendships and Family

X3

Gain Physical Assets to Support Expansion

X2

Gain Employees to Support Expansion

X2

Keep Quality of Products

X1

Total

Alternative 1

Do Nothing / Do Not Expand

0x5=0

3x4=12

3x3=9

0x2=0

0x2=0

0x1=0

21

Alternative 2

Utilize Friends and Family

2x5=12

2x4=8

1x3=3

1x2=2

2x2=4

1x1=1

30

Alternative 3

Hire Temp-Workers

2x5=12

2x4=8

3x3=9

1x2=2

2x2=4

2x1=2

37

Alternative 4

Take A Loan

3x5=15

1x4=4

3x3=9

3x2=6

3x2=6

3x1=3

43

Alternative 5

Purchase Equipment

3x5=15

2x4=8

3x3=9

3x2=6

1x2=2

3x1=3

43

Explanation of Rating and Choice

Process- In this process we were able to identify the importance of each alternative, by weighing the importance of the objectives. By weighting the importance of the objectives, we were able to determine by numerical values the best or most desirable alternative for FNS.

Bias- This step curbs bias, because it focuses on the actual numerical values of each alternative. By highlighting the importance of the objectives with weighted values and measuring them to alternatives ability to satisfy the objective, we are able to compare and contrast the alternatives, based on objectivity and performance.

Application- The choices were applied in order of importance to James and Allison desire to expand the business. Based off the desire to maintain their current living especially their 401k and relationships with their family and friends, the weights were determined as such